1
The Gospel of Mark
Mark was the least quoted Gospel by ancient and medieval Christian writers. About the
middle of the 19th century a change occurred that placed Mark clearly as the oldest and
most historical of the four Gospels. Several points are given to support this view. First, it
is the shortest of the Gospels. It is much easier to see Matthew and Luke as adding birth
narratives, more of Jesus’ teaching, and accounts of resurrection appearances than to
conceive of mark abbreviating their Gospels. Second, both Matthew and Luke
occasionally differ from Mark’s order, but they never agree against Mark in the order of
units of the Gospels. The best explanation is that while Matthew and Luke expand the
information they agree to use Mark as their model. Third, Matthew and Luke seem to
improve on Mark in various ways. Their language (vocabulary, style, grammar) is
superior, Matthew especially compressed Mark’s individual accounts, something often
accomplished with rewriting. And Matthew and Luke do not have many of the candid
statements of Mark that could be misunderstood and cause offense. That Matthew and
Mark improve or add material not in Mark is much easier than believing Mark impaired
the accounts of Matthew and Luke.
Mark is not a biography or history in the modern sense. It does not deal exhaustively with
such things as family backgrounds, influences on Jesus, or periods of his life. Mark’s
primary purpose was not to set forth historical facts as objectively as possible. His
purpose was to describe Jesus in such a way as to promote loyalty to him and his
teaching.
Author - The Gospel itself is anonymous and gives no author internally. One must turn
to ancient traditions to find the author. It has already been stated that Justin Martyr,
Ireaneaus, Papias and Clement of Alexandria all write of Mark as the author. Papias’
testimony is very important as he quotes an elder who quoted to him Mark was the
interpreter of Peter and wrote accurately but not in order what Peter had told to Mark.
Who this elder was is a mystery. Whoever he was, he must have been a disciple of the
apostles. The early church fathers are nearly unanimous Mark wrote Peter’s Gospel. As
one man put it; “If it was not John Mark, we have no idea who it could have been.” A
mark of canonicity was that the book must be written by an apostle or a disciple of an
apostle. Mark was not an apostle, and his work would not have been accepted if they had
not known he wrote it and based it on the words of Simon Peter. The association of Mark
with Peter is attested independently in 1 Peter 5:13.
If Mark is the author what do we know about him? Some claim he is the young man of
Mark 14:15-52, but we cannot be certain of that. Acts 12:12 implies that his mother was a
person of means who had a house large enough for Christians to meet there. This may be
what we know of in literature as the “Church of the Apostles” and is now where the
“Upper Room” is located in present day Jerusalem. Acts also relates how Paul and
Barnabas took him from Jerusalem to Antioch, how he went on the first missionary
journey to Cyprus and left them at Perga. Paul later refused to take him on the second
journey and Barnabas leaves Paul, takes John Mark and goes to Cyprus. All of this is
found in Acts 12-15. Colossians 4:10 seems to tell us John Mark was Barnabas’ cousin
2
and that he was at Rome at the time of the writing. 2 Timothy 4:11 shows Paul’s desire to
have Mark join him in Rome. 1 Peter 5:13 associates him with Peter in Rome. If this is
the case Mark could quite possibly have been written from Rome during Peter’s
imprisonment and prior to his execution. Many Christians have always wondered why
Peter did not write a gospel, we now know why. The Gospel of Mark is the story of Jesus
according to Peter. Later, an unsubstantiated tradition, says Mark began pastor in
Alexandria, Egypt, died a martyr’s death (Hippolytus of Rome, also in the Paschal
Chronicle).
Date - Mark probably dates after 64 A.D. but before 70 A.D. Mark offers words of
encouragement for persecution that began (8:34-38; 10:38-40) about 64 A.D., and hints at
an impending destruction of Jerusalem in chapter 13. But Mark does not “describe” the
devastation which did not occur until A.D. 70. Peter is also believed to have died right
after the burning of Rome and during the persecution of Nero that followed. It was then
Mark saw a need for a written record of the Gospel to continue after the eye witnesses
were gone.
Purpose - Several so-called purposes for Mark’s writing are given. First, there was a
growing desire for an orderly and connected written account of Jesus. Isolated stories
were no longer adequate. Even oral tradition was no longer satisfactory for many. A
broad outline-but not a full chronology-of the life of Jesus was available to Mark.
Second, there was a desire to minister to the churches. Some also see a desire to clarify
Jesus’ teachings about the future. The crucial item is that no one can know when Jesus
will return or when the end of the age will take place. This is especially reasonable when
with the passage of time and persecution all the eyewitnesses are dying and still no
parousia.
Background - The four Gospel’s deal with the same basic material with the first three
being called-synoptic, meaning “to see together.” Mark wrote primarily for the Romans
and presents Jesus as “the servant.” There is no genealogy in Mark, not an account of his
birth. Romans and Gentiles would not be as interested in these two items as Jesus would.
Mark gives work after work, recording 20 miracles in detail.
Problems - Mark has only one real problem-his ending 16:9-20. The largest number of
manuscripts support this ending, but they are mostly later manuscripts. A short ending
16:8 is found, but only in one manuscript. The suggestion is that Mark ends at 16:8.
When chapter 1:1 through 16:8 are compared to 16:9ff, it does seem to show a different
style. There are four theories of Mark’s ending, or rather this long ending of 16:9-20.
1.
2.
3
3.
4.
Mark is the people’s Gospel for he presents the facts and does not try to make them
theological. He leaves that for the other writers. His concern is for the Gentile readers and
so he quotes sparingly from the Old Testament, and rarely delves in prophetic fulfillment.
Mark speaks in the language of the common man. Mark places great emphasis on the
divinity of Jesus for he shows that God acknowledged his son at the start of his ministry,
and on the Mount of Transfiguration. He also shows his humanity. According to Mark,
the incarnation is real, Jesus was of a truth both God and Man.
Chapter 1
1:1
The introduction presents Jesus, the main character of the following
narrative, as an extraordinary person who was proclaimed by a prophet
whose mission had been foretold in scripture, who at the beginning of his
own ministry was commended by a voice from heaven, and who withstood
the assaults of Satan.
The “Gospel about Jesus Christ” well describes the entire work. Mark did
not intend to put a title to his work, however, because until about A.D. 150
the word “gospel” was used to refer to the Christian message, not to books
that contained one aspect of that message, and because he preceded the
expression with the word “beginning.”
4
The name Jesus is equivalent to the Hebrew “Joshua,” which means
Yahweh (God) saves. .
The Greek word “Christ” is the equivalent of the Hebrew “Messiah” and is
actually translated “Messiah” in some passages by other versions (HRSV,
NEB, REB, and GNB). Both mean “the anointed one,” a person
commissioned by God for a special task.
The term “Christ” or “Messiah” was originally a title, but by Mark’s day,
it was on the way to becoming a proper name (9:41). The word appears
only seven times in Mark (1:1; 8:29; 9:41; 12:35; 13:21; 14:61; 15:32; also
1:34 as a variant reading), probably reflecting the reluctance of the Jews to
employ or accept it when used by others because of its nationalistic
connotations. For Mark, Jesus was the one above all others who was
anointed by God for the greatest task of all times.
The title “Son of God” appears here and at the end of Mark bracketing the
entire book to emphasize this truth for readers. The very first sentence
shows Mark’s Gospel is more than a narrative of events. It is also a
theology, primarily a Christology. Jesus is the promised Messiah and the
very Son of God.
Without any warning Mark plunges into his account. Mark wrote to the
Romans who were not so much interested in where Jesus came from, or
even Jesus feelings as they were in what Jesus did.
1:2-3
Even though Mark wrote for Roman readers he does not forget that this
gospel is grounded in Hebrew life and scripture. Jesus is one whose life
and work were foretold by the Hebrew prophets.
Isaiah (40:3) supplies only the part of the quotation in verse 3. The part of
verse 2 is from Malachi 3:1. This is not a problem as Malachi depends on
5
Isaiah for clarity. The significance is that both Jesus and John the Baptist
appeared as a result of divine providence. Mark was following current
literary practice in grouping prophecies under one name. He names Isaiah
since he was regarded as the chief of the prophets. In citing these two
prophecies Mark has two purposes.
1:4
John is introduced abruptly. Certainly the original hearers/readers already
knew something about him. The locale of his ministry was the desert—the
uninhabited region of the barren gorge of the Jordan River. Mark simply
presents John full-grown and active in his work. The desert is a major
theme in this introduction (vs. 3, 4, 12, 13).
John came as a herald of the king. “Preach” means (Kerusso) proclaiming
the message of the king before him. He was to be heard and obeyed as if
they king himself were delivering the message.
John came baptizing, immersing Jews who showed repentance. This was
one of the most distinctive aspects of his ministry. The baptism
symbolized the cleansing from sin that repentance effects. The baptism of
Jesus is only briefly described in 1:9-10. This is because the emphasis was
not on the act but the meaning of the act as shown with the use of
baptisma.
A.T. Robertson translates it “with reference to.” Even the English word
“for” is used in this sense. “He was executed for murder.” He was
executed not that he might murder, but because he had already murdered.
John’s preaching was a bold indictment of the religious faith of his day.
He was requiring of the Jews what they required of the Gentiles.
6
1:5-6
This verse may seem to exaggerate somewhat it does accurately reflect the
popularity of John. It is hard to account for the tremendous response of the
people to John’s message. There was nothing enjoyable about it. It was a
strong declaration that the “day of judgment” was at hand and condemned
the people’s sin.
The one who truly believes his message intensely, with genuine
conviction, has the power to persuade others.
The verb tenses used of the crowd make a moving picture. The “people
kept coming out” as a steady stream (imperfect), and they “were from time
to time being baptized” (imperfect), “keeping on confessing” (present)
their sins.
From all accounts, John was a desert dweller and probably had some
contact with the Essenes, maybe at Qumran itself. This would explain his
asceticism—not his theology. Evidently, his life was a solitary one and
very primitive. He was clothed in “camel’s hair.” This was a garment
woven out of camel’s hair with a leather belt or girdle. It was not for show
as the word “clothed” shows us, it refers to his customary form of dress.
He ate locusts and wild honey. This could be insects dried or a type of pod
from a locust tree-like a bean.
1:7-8
John’s message concerned not only a way of life and a rite symbolizing
that way of life but a person. The concepts of a coming one and a powerful
one have messianic implications that would not be missed by his hearers.
The concept of a baptism of the Holy Spirit fulfills Isa. 32:15; 44:3; Ezek.
11:19; 36:26-27; 37:14; Joel 2:28-29.
7
John’s message was to make them ready to acknowledge Jesus as the
coming one. Apparently John was greatly disturbed by the impression he,
himself, had made on the people. It would seem some were saying John
was the Messiah. John makes it clear-he is not the deliverer but one is
coming.
Perhaps no one was ever more tempted to stand in the bright light of
public acclaim more than John. It was a tribute to his strength of character,
that he was so completely willing to accept the lesser role that had been
given him by God. John placed himself as not being worthy to be the slave
who washes the feet of guests in the home of the master. This is quite a
contrast with the scene in the Upper Room the night of the Lord’s Supper.
Charles R. Erdman contrasts the ministry of John and Jesus;
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1:9-11
Mark says nothing about Jesus’ ancestors, his family (but note 3:31-35;
6:3), or his childhood and youth. His Gospel is concerned only with Jesus’
ministry and death. The most striking aspect of Mark’s account of the
baptism are its brevity and lack of apology. So potentially embarrassing is
the idea that the Christian Lord was baptized by a Jewish prophet in a rite
that for others symbolized repentance for their sins that the early church
would never have invented the story. messianic consciousness? Was it the
occasion of his call? Certainly it signaled the start of his ministry, public
one that is.
8
1:9
“At that time” is one of Mark’s vague indications of chronology. It simply
refers to the time John was baptizing. “Nazareth” was such an obscure
village it is not mentioned in the Old Testament, Josephus or Rabbinic
literature. In Jewish life, a rabbi began his public ministry at 30 years of
age. Luke notes this was Jesus’ age when he began his ministry (3:23).
John was six months his senior (Luke 1:36).
But why was Jesus baptized? To say it was a baptism of repentance would
be contrary to the entire New Testament. He had no sin of which to repent.
But there are definite reasons why Jesus came to John for baptism.
1.
2.
1:10
By telling us Jesus alone heard the voice of God, Mark provides the first
intimation of his secrecy motif. The true identity of Jesus is concealed
from the characters of the story, but not from the readers/hearers. By using
the expression “heaven being torn open,” he suggests divine intervention
and new revelation after a period of silence (Isa. 64:1).
This does not mean Jesus did not have the Spirit prior to this moment. But
he comes into Jesus in a special manifestation. He literally becomes not
just the Spirit of God but also the Spirit of Christ. So he is intimately
identified as doing the work of both God the Father and Christ the Son.
9
The source of the comparison of the Spirit to a dove is uncertain because
the Old Testament never, and rabbinic literature but rarely, makes the
association. Perhaps the source is meditation upon Genesis 1:2. The dove
has always been symbolic of purity, meekness, and gentleness. It is also a
symbol of sacrifice.
1:11
There was another heavenly phenomenon at the baptism of Jesus - a
“voice from heaven.” This was the voice of the Father affirming Jesus as
His Son. He had been the Son all along. But here the father placed his
approval upon the Son’s life thus far, an approval which will continue to
the end.
Mark’s treatment of the baptism, though brief, is very important. The
Gospel opens with the statement that Jesus is the Son of God. At the
baptism, God himself affirmed that Jesus is His Son. “Jesus is shown as
one who knows himself at once to be the Messiah and the lowly Servant of
the Lord. And if Jesus knew, even at his baptism, that as Messiah he must
go the way marked out for the Servant of the Lord (Isa. 53 shows the
ending of the road), may we not say that, even then there must have fallen
across his path the shadow of a cross” (Achibald Hunter; The Gospel
According to Saint Mark; MacMillan Company, 1953, p.29).
1:12-13
The emphasis here is divine necessity “sent him out,” not that Jesus was
reluctant to go. The desert was the place of John’s preaching; it was also
the place of Jesus’ temptation. Again, we are astounded at Mark’s brevity.
According to Jewish belief, evil spirits lived in the wilderness. Wild beasts
lived there. It was a place of testing one’s commitment and for refinement
of understanding. Jesus was put to the test by Satan, the great adversary of
God and man. He says Jesus spent 40 days in the wilderness, a wild region
just west of Jericho. His only companions were “the wild beasts”. Mark
does not indicate whether the animals were at peace with Jesus
10
symbolizing the tranquility of the messianic kingdom or at odds with him
typifying the forces of evil.
While here he was “tempted” or better translated “tested by Satan. Mark
gives no details but Matthew and Luke are clear that the temptations
revolved about the nature of Jesus’ messiahship.
But was it possible for Jesus to be tempted and sin? John A Broadus gives
us a good answer.
“If we think of his human nature in itself, apart from the co-linked
divinity, and apart from the Holy Spirit that filled and led him, then
we must say that, like Adam in his state of purity, like the angels
and every other moral creature, his humanity was certainly in itself
capable of sinning, and thus the temptation was real, and was felt
as such, and as such was overcome; while yet in virtue of union
with the divine nature, and of the power of the Holy Spirit that
filled him, it was morally impossible that he would sin (Alvah
Hovey, An American Commentary on the New Testament,
Philadelphia; American Baptist Publishing Society; 1886; I, 61).
In a sense, therefore, the temptation was a proof of Jesus’ real humanity;
and his unqualified victory over the adversary was, no less, a proof of his
real deity.
11
1:14
Mark’s first division focuses on the crowds and is set in Galilee and the
surrounding regions. Mark pictures Jesus as constantly moving around
from place to place which emphasizes the urgency of his message about
the kingdom.
Mark places the beginning of Jesus’ ministry after John’s imprisonment,
although he does not describe John’s imprisonment or death until 6:14-29.
Mark locates the major portion of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee, the northern
part of Palestine, which had a larger Gentile element than did Judea.
There seems to be a conflict with the Gospel of John here. John shows
Jesus returned to Galilee and after a brief ministry there made a journey to
Jerusalem for Passover and a brief ministry in Judea (1:43-3:36). This
consumed about a year which Robertson calls “the year of obscurity.” It
was after this that Jesus returned to Galilee through Samaria (John 4). At
this point Mark, followed by Matthew and Luke relate Jesus’ return to
Galilee. There is no conflict here between Mark and John. John shows a
continuing ministry of the Baptist after Jesus’ baptism (3:22-36). And
Mark notes that Jesus returned to Galilee after John’s arrest (vs. 14). Later
he enlarges on this matter (6:17 ff).
Jesus’ preaching of the Gospel shows his continuity with John the Baptist.
But there was a different emphasis. John’s message centered in
“repentance” as an evidence that one was willing to participate in the
kingdom when it came, Jesus preached “the Gospel of God,” or the Good
news that the kingdom had come with the king.
1:15
The term translated “time” is Kairos and means a favorable, opportune, or
significant time as opposed to mere chronology (chronos).
“Kingdom of God” appears 14 times in Mark. The Synoptic Gospels see it
as a major subject of Jesus’ message. First-century Judaism saw it as a
future, earthly kingdom in which God through Israel would rule over the
12
nations. However, with a few exceptions (14:25 and 15:43) Mark refers to
a present, spiritual kingdom rather than a future earthly one. So, to Mark,
kingdom is the kingly rule, the reign, dominion, sovereignty of God in the
hearts of the people.
Jesus claimed the kingdom had drawn near with his appearance. The reign
of God began to take place in the life and ministry of Jesus, but it was not
fully manifested then and will not be until Jesus returns. Jesus, like John,
preached repentance, but the distinctive element in his message was faith,
commitment or trust. The necessity of faith in Mark is a major subject.
Jesus’ teaching on the kingdom, can be summarized as follows…
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1:17
By beginning Jesus’ ministry with this account, Mark showed that the
disciples were qualified to be witnesses of Jesus’ entire ministry. He
showed Jesus took the initiative in making disciples. They don’t seek him,
he seeks them.
13
The other gospels note that prior to this occurrence, Jesus had paid a
second visit to Cana (John 2:1-11; 4:46-54), had been rejected at Nazareth
(Luke 4:16; 31), and had set up headquarters in Capernaum, a city on the
northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee (Matt. 4:13-16).
.
Mark referred to the first of the two persons seen by Jesus as Simon six
times, Peter 18 times, and Simon Peter once. Mark contains more
references to Simon in proportion to length than any other gospel, perhaps
showing a special interest in him, but not proving Peter was a source of
information.
“Left” is literally “forsook.” Without hesitation they broke completely
with their former occupations to become followers of Jesus. “Followed”
means literally to walk side-by-side with Jesus.
1:19
James and John are mentioned together nine times in Mark with James’
name appearing twice in two of the passages. John alone is mentioned in
9:38. They also were “called.” James and John had finished their catch and
were mending their broken nets for future use. Luke tells us that Simon,
Andrew, James and John were “partners” (Luke 5:7). Seeing these two
brothers who had also believed in Jesus previously, He issued to them the
same challenge that He had given to Simon and Andrew.
1:20
They respond in similar fashion.
In these few lines we have one of the most famous acts of obedience in
history. Christ came with a radical message and then a radical call and
these four responded in radical obedience. They would receive an
immensely expanded life. The horizon of these fisherman’s lives was
bound by the margins of Galilee. Once in a while they may go to
Jerusalem but by and large they know little more than the deck of a boat,
the currents of the Lake, and the handful of people in the marketplace.
Their conversation consisted of trade talk, local gossip, family affairs, and
Galilean politics.
14
Simon was a born leader. Someone has said of Simon that he was always
striking twelve o’clock-sometimes the twelve of midnight, as when he
shamefully denied the Lord, and sometimes the twelve of noonday, as
when he boldly confessed that Jesus was indeed “the Christ, the Son of the
living God.”
Andrew, Simon’s brother, was an entirely difference sort of man. His great
gift was that of bringing others to Jesus-first his own brother, then the lad
with the fishes and loaves, then the enquiring Greeks. He was the master
of winning others to the Lord.
John was a man of spiritual insight. Though he was a man of passion, a
“Son of Thunder,” he was to become known as the “beloved disciple.”
James was a man of real courage and devotion. He was to be the first of
“The Twelve” to die as a martyr to Christ.
There are some important observances of Mark 1:16-20…
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
15
7.
1:17
The idea of following Jesus is frequent in Mark and denotes discipleship.
The idea is that of responding to a summons, attachment to a person,
acceptance of authority, and imitation of example.
Note that Mark pictured Jesus as an example of what he required of others.
This was a challenge to leave their livelihood to cast their lot with Jesus.
1:18
Mark said nothing of a previous encounter. He shows the ideal response to
the command of Jesus. It should be immediate. It seems Simon and
Andrew leave a lucrative business and perhaps their families to follow
Jesus
1:21
Capernaum is not mentioned in the Old Testament it is/was an important
town on the northwestern shore of the Sea of Galilee. The name means
village of Nahum or village of consolation. Capernaum lay on the main
road between Egypt and Mesopotamia, in the tetrarchy (rule of a fourth
part or any petty, kingdom) of Herod Antipas and was the site of a toll
station. Jesus seems to have made Capernaum his headquarters during
most of his Galilean ministry.
16
The synagogue was a place of informal worship and instruction and
probably originated during the Babylonian exile. It was a common
practice for visiting teachers to be invited to read scripture and speak to
the members. Fifteen times Mark indicates Jesus taught (v. 22; 2:13; 4:12; 6:2, 34; 8:31; 9:31; 10:1; 11:17; 12:14, 35; 14:49).
Here, in Galilee, Mark begins to record the public ministry of Jesus.
Jesus probably chose the Galilee for several reasons…
1.
2.
3.
1:22
The reason for the amazement was that Jesus taught on the basis of his
own authority and not by citing previous scholars as did the other teachers
of that day. The word “amazed” renders a verb that means to be struck
with astonishment throughout his lesson.
1:23
The teaching of Jesus was abruptly interrupted by a man possessed of an
unclean spirit, an evil spirit. The recording of such demonic activity
should not be treated as a primitive explanation for physical or
psychological illness. A better explanation is that there is much less
evidence of the demonic today because Jesus won a decisive, although not
17
yet total, victory over them. Luke, a physician, a scientist, and a historian
whose accuracy is without question, speaks of demons as a reality. Jesus
certainly accepted them as such. Either they are real or Jesus played to the
crowd by not being honest with the people, was ignorant, or guilty of
hypocrisy. The Bible teaches the continuing conflict between God and
Satan in the spiritual realm (Eph. 6:11-12).
Jesus is really the center of this account. Mark emphasized Jesus’
authority, divine character, attack on evil and direct command to the
demon. Above everything, Mark stressed that Jesus’ divine authority
overcame the demon.
1:24
We have the words of the demon, words of the demon’s own doom and
fear of it. The questions seek to put Jesus on the defensive and force him
to justify his actions. That is the first sentence. The second sentence could
be an assertion more than a question, “You have come to destroy us.” The
demon acknowledges the true identity of Jesus-something the disciples
were slow to do, only at the crucifixion did a human being confess Jesus
as the Son of God, and he was not one of the disciples (15:39).
1:25-26
Jesus rebuked the demon and silences him. Jesus did not want the
testimony of demons. All too soon there would be those who accuse him
of being in a league with demons-he would give them no ammunition to
cloud the truth. Immediately, the demon is told to come out of the man. He
obeys. But in doing so it shows its rage at being disembodied. It shook or
“tore” the man. The man went into a convulsive spasm. He literally
screeches as it leaves. What an exciting moment in the synagogue.
1:27-28
We see the effect on the witnesses. Again, Mark stresses the authority of
Jesus, a major reason for recording the event. There were no incantations
18
or magic words, just a word of command and it was done. Like wildfire
the word spreads through the land.
1:29-31
Mark now sets forth the shortest miracle in the Gospels. We see the
persons, setting and results but no symptoms. Nor do we have a record of
the effect on the witnesses of this miracle. By showing Peter was married,
Mark seems to imply again that discipleship sometimes involves leaving
one’s family, for a while at least. We see the quickness and completeness
of the cure.
1:32-34
This text suggests that there were other, many other, healings and
exorcisms that are not described in detail. In keeping with no work or
burden, on the Sabbath, the people wait till its end to bring these souls to
Jesus (that evening after sunset). So there must have been quite a crowd.
Peter could remember every moment of the event. Jesus kept on silencing
the demons, he refuses them the privilege. He did not want their
testimony.
1:35
Mark records what may have been a moment of crisis for Jesus, a moment
of temptation to take a different road than he was sent for, one of miracles
not death. Jesus seeks a solitary, dessert, abandoned place to pray. Mark
tells us it was proi, or the last watch of the night, from 3 to 6 a.m. Further
it was in the early (ennucha) part of that watch, while it was still dark. He
continued to pray until it was dawn.
19
1:37
Here Mark shows the error of the disciples. They wanted Jesus to take
advantage of his popularity and perform more miracles. However, Jesus’
ministry was not to be a miracle-worker but a redeemer. “Looking” as a
verb is filled with irony. Certainly here it is meant in a good sense but
elsewhere is translated as “seeking with an evil intent or inappropriate
intention.”
Verse 37 is the first recorded instance we have of the disciples failure to
understand Jesus’ mission.
1:38
Jesus has other plans. The “somewhere else” were country towns, out-ofthe-way places. Where most preachers seek the teeming cities Jesus
sought the sparsely settled villages. They too, needed the Gospel.
1:40
Leprosy, at this time, included any of a number of skin diseases that
rendered its victim religiously and socially unclean. Such were required to
live outside of towns and cities, have no contact with anyone, and declare
themselves unclean when anyone approached. All this is found in
Leviticus 13-14. The Bible never speaks of “healing” leprosy only the
“cleansing” of it. Here the implication is Jesus not only cleanses but can
heal or forgive.
Contrary to the law the man approaches Jesus. “If you are willing”
probably denotes no doubt on the part of the leper. But an appeal that only
you can do this.
1:41-42
But he did not reckon with Jesus’ heart. Jesus was moved with
compassion. Only Mark mentions this. The pitiful plight of the man
arroused Jesus’ pity and love.
Some versions have “moved with anger” in place of compassion. What
would he be angry at—the leper-hardly. Perhaps, the religious leaders who
20
had no time for the man or the condition itself. Perhaps both are neededcompassion can come from anger at sin and injustice.
1:43-44
Why the strong warning that implies anger?
1:45
The secret cannot be contained. The man’s great joy could not be
contained-even by a command.
Chapter 2
In chapters 2:1-3:6 Mark tells five conflict stories and introduces various
opponents of Jesus and the early church. The arrangement may be topical
more than chronological. Each contains an important pronouncement of
Jesus (2:10, 17, 19, 28; 3:4). Mark first prepared for his passion narrative
by showing how the religious leaders oppressed Jesus throughout his
ministry (cf. 3:6), and second, preserved material that was valuable in
polemics with the Jews and others in his own day. Christians of all ages
have had opponents and have had to defend their beliefs. This passage has
given and continues to give some direction in doing so.
2:1
The Greek says “It was heard that he was in the house”
2:2
Most homes of this era were from one to four rooms with a courtyard.
Jesus preaches so even those outside the home can hear.
The disease is not described beyond the mere indication of paralysis.
Some versions were the word “friend” here for the four men who brought
the ill man. Mark’s version is the only one that says “friends.”
2:4
Like many Palestinian houses it had an outdoor staircase to a flat roof
made of branches and sod. To make an opening in such a roof was not
21
overly difficult. An opening was needed due to the crowd about the door
and in the courtyard. They were unable to get the man to Jesus.
2:5
The reference to “faith” is significant. The reference is to the faith of the
four who went to such lengths to get the invalid to Jesus. Mark is not
implying the invalid had no faith-the “their” could also include him. In
Nazareth Jesus could do no mighty works because of the villager’s
unbelief (Matthew 13:58). But here in Capernaum there was abundant
faith upon which Jesus could act. But Jesus says nothing of the paralysis
instead his sins were pronounced forgiven. Jesus did not upbraid him as a
sinner, but spoke kindly to him as a sinner in need of his ministry. Jesus
hated sin but loved sinners. It is possible that some sin had caused his
paralysis. So, Jesus began at the proper place. He went to the heart of the
matter. Though men might not think so, his greater need was spiritual
healing.
2:6-7
Teachers of the law, scribes, were there and the text says “reasoning in
their hearts.” They accuse Jesus of blasphemy which is irreverent, profane,
impious speech about God.
2:8-9
Supernaturally Jesus knows what they are thinking. Jesus challenges them
to make a decision. “Which of the two” (literally) is easier Jesus says. Are
you more concerned over his physical well-being than spiritual? If I can
heal his body can I not and am I not in authority to forgive his sins?
2:10
Here appears for the first of 14 times in Mark the term “Son of Man.” It is
the most frequent Christological term in Mark. Why did Jesus choose this
term for himself? The best answer is its ambiguity. It could refer to an
ordinary person (Psalm 8:4; 144:3) or to a supernatural being (Daniel
7:13). It has overtones both of humanity and divinity. By using it Jesus
forced persons to make up their own minds as to who he was.
22
2:11-12
Mark indicates the immediacy of the cure and its effect on those who saw
it. The people are amazed and glorify God. The scribes By their own
admission, the scribes had said that only God could forgive their sins.
Thus with their own words Jesus had proven His right to his claim as
deity.
2:13-14
In the parallel of Mathew 9:9 the person is called Matthew and the
traditional view is they are both the same man. Although Mark does not
mention a place, the episode probably occurred at Capernaum.
Jesus’ words are not a request but a command- “follow me.” No previous
mention of Levi had been given in Mark. However, in all likelihood he
was familiar with Jesus. It is unlikely anyone living in Capernaum had not
heard of Jesus. More than likely he had heard him teach. Such a command
strongly implies Jesus knew Levi, or at least knew about him.
2:15
Sinners is in quotation marks accurately as its very use shows it is being
used with an unusual meaning. The reference is not to immoral or
irreligious persons but to those who because of the necessity of spending
all their time earning a bare subsistence were not able to keep the law,
especially the oral law, as the scribes thought they should. As a result the
scribes despised them. Perhaps a simile would be “outcast.”
Pharisees said, “Become good and we will accept you.” Jesus said, “Come
as you are, and I will help you become good.” The quality of Jesus’
friendship with sinners was such that he raised the level of their lives
without lowering his level.
23
2:16
We cannot understand, how scandalous this eating with sinners was to the
Pharisees. In Semitic society table fellowship was one of the most intimate
expressions of friendship.
2:17
Jesus affirmed his mission was to call “sinners,” not just to repentance but
to full acceptance in the Kingdom of God. So for Jesus not to associate
with sinners would have been as silly as for a doctor not to associate with
the sick. The word “righteous” is probably used in irony to mean self
righteous, for such were many of the scribes.
2:18
If the imperfect tense is customary then it means “made a practice of
fasting.” The only biblically prescribed fast was on the Day of Atonement
(Lev. 16), although other fasts grew up late in the Old Testament period
(Zech. 5:5; 8:19).
2:19-20
Jesus replies by reminding them that his disciples had no reason to fast.
Fasting is a sign of mourning. So, why should the children of the bride
chamber mourn while the bridegroom is still with here.
2:21-22
These twin parables teach the incompatibility of the old (scribal Judaism)
and the new (Christianity). Judaism is the old garment and the old
wineskin. Christianity is the new garment (implied), the new wineskin and
24
the new wine. The point is not that the old is wrong or evil but that its time
has passed. Old wineskins have already stretched as far as possible under
previous fermentation, new fermentation will burst them.
The Pharisees sought to confine John and Jesus’ work to “their” old forms.
Jesus says that is impossible. Thiers was a way of legalism while his was
one of grace. Theirs was one of bondage. His was one of freedom. Theirs
was a brittle form of ritual; His was the expanding form of the Spirit.
2:23
The Sabbath was the distinctive element in the Jewish faith. However, it is
difficult to identify the simplicity of Exodus 20:8-12 with the elaborate
system of Sabbath observances in Judaism. The fourth commandment
simply forbade work on that day. Jewish interpreters had defined work. In
so doing they had lain down 39 basic actions, and then subdivided these
into hundreds of prohibitions.
25
2:24
Apparently, Pharisees were following them and accuse them of breaking
the Law. They did not question what they were doing just that they were
doing in the Sabbath. The disciples were not breaking the Law but one of
the meticulous rules of the Pharisees. To the Pharisees picking the grain
was reaping, rubbing it in their hands was threshing, and blowing away the
chaff was winnowing.
2:25-26
The reference here is to 1 Samuel 21:1-6. The “consecrated bread” was the
twelve loaves put on the table of the Tabernacle each Sabbath symbolizing
God’s presence and provision. These were eaten only by the priests at the
end of the week. David and his men were not priests, but Jesus implied
what they did was justified because they were famished. Jesus sent forth
the basic principle that human need should take precedence over
ceremonial laws.
2:27-28
Jesus meant that men were not created to observe the Sabbath but that the
Sabbath was created for their benefit. The Sabbath is not an end in itself or
the greatest good. Jesus affirms his right to determine Sabbath observance.
Divinity is meant here. God gave the Sabbath and his Son can determine
its observance. The meaning was unmistakable to the Pharisees.
Chapter 3
3:1
This account does not emphasize the healing but the question of Sabbath
observance.
26
“Withered” is a perfect passive participle. This means the hand was
completely withered but he was not born with it. It was the result of an
accident of disease.
3:2
The Pharisees literally “kept on watching,” or “kept on laying in wait.”
They were more concerned to accuse Jesus than to worship. The Scribal
rule allowed healing/treatment on the Sabbath only where life was in
danger, here that was not the case.
3:3
He is called to literally “get up in the middle” before them all. In this era
most seats were on benches alongside the wall. Come out in front of
everyone is the meaning. Jesus would leave no doubt what he was about to
do. The Pharisees covertly watch from the side. But Jesus proposed to act
openly before the eyes of all.
3:4
By his questions Jesus lifted the issue of Sabbath observance above a list
of prohibition to the higher general principle. No one would claim that it
was lawful or right to do evil or kill on the Sabbath. The obvious
alternative is that it must be right to do good and save life.
.3:5
Here is a reference to the anger of Jesus. Jesus’ anger is not sinful because
it was directed toward evil and because it was controlled. Jesus never
shows anger at pain of his own, when others did it to him. He shows it
often when directed to those he loves.
3:6
In all of ancient literature the Herodians are referred to only here and in
12:13 (cf. Matt. 22:16). Ordinarily, the Pharisees had nothing to do with
the Herodians, but common enemies make strange bedfellows.
27
3:7-8
The word “withdrew” can mean “flee from danger” and so some have
thought Jesus was trying to avoid persecution. Others have suggested that
it intimates his rejection of Judaism. Probably, it refers to nothing more
than Jesus’ desire to extend his ministry beyond the towns and their
synagogues.
.
3:9-10
The scene is one of great commotion, involving pushing and shoving.
Apparently, many sought Jesus because of his healings. Even so, Jesus
healed many. Since he was by the Sea of Galilee he was probably standing
at the water’s edge. So, as a caution he tells the disciples to have a boat
handy. If necessary, he could stand in the boat away from them to teach.
3:11-12
Here, the demons explicitly confess Jesus is “The Son of God.” This is
the ultimate Christological title. But this is not a confession of faith but of
fear, and even opposition. Jesus silenced them for this title could only
properly be understood in light of his crucifixion and resurrection.
Therefore, the time for such explicit confession had not come.
3:13
Many see this group as larger than the twelve and out of this “group.” The
twelve are called and chosen as Apostles- the sent out ones.
3:14-15
The number twelve recalls the twelve tribes of Israel and therefore
symbolizes the new or restored people of God, which later came to be
known as the church. The Twelve were the nucleus of this new creation.
Jesus has two purposes for them. First, to be with Him. Second, that they
28
go for him. “Be with him” is a present subjunctive form which means
“continuously with him.” The divine order is to “come” and then “go.”
3:16-19
Mark proceeds to name the Twelve.
This was quite a diverse group. One thing they had in common is that
there was not a priest or theologian among them. They were ordinary
laymen in the popular sense of that word.
3:20
The material in verse 20-21 are not found in another gospel. Locating the
house was not important to Mark. It may have been that of Simon and
Andrew in Capernaum. A large, demanding unruly crowd is depicted.
3:21
The concern of Jesus’ family was probably primarily over the family’s
reputation because in their estimation Jesus was acting in a fanatical, even
insane way. They literally had come to “arrest” or seize Jesus by force to
return to Nazareth with him in tow.
3:22
It seems the Pharisees and Herodians had sent to Jerusalem for help. They
“came down” meaning from the giant hills of Jerusalem to the rolling hills
of Galilee. Jesus’ ministry had come to the attention of the
“establishment” in Jerusalem.
3:23-27
Jesus replied by showing how foolish the accusation was. Satan would be
working against himself. Jesus illustrates this with three brief parables; the
29
divided kingdom, the divided house, and the binding of a strong man by a
stronger man.
3:28-30
At this point, Jesus spoke some of the most awesome words which ever
fell from his lips. Jesus calls attention to the serious nature of that which
follows “I tell you the truth.” Blasphemy here is “being irreverent,” being
“defiant” towards God. The sudden interjection of the Holy Spirit is meant
as a contrast. Instead of working with an evil spirit Jesus works by the
Holy Spirit.
They were hardened against the Holy Spirit’s work. And since it is he who
convicts of sin, they rejected his work altogether. No conviction, no
repentance; no repentance, no faith; no faith, no salvation. Thus, an
unpardonable sin.
3:31-32
Inside the house, Jesus was sitting in the midst of a circle of people
surrounding him. Some of them relay the message his family waits for him
outside. Jesus then made a strange reply in the form of a question in effect
saying, “Just who is my family?” Jesus then spoke of a new relationship.
His primary relationship is no longer genetical but spiritual. Already at
Cana, Jesus had gently suggested this fact that to Mary (John 2:4). Now he
announced it formally. The relationship between Jesus and Mary was no
30
longer that of mother and son. It was that of a sinner saved by grace and
her saviour.
Four suggestions on what constituted true kinship:
1.
2.
3.
4.